Politics of Enterprise Architecture(?!)

Is Enterprise Architecture a breeding ground for politics? As with any human activities and relationships, there is politics, but to what degree?

Some time ago, someone, reviewing my book, pointed out that there is no section on the politics of Enterprise Architecture (EA). I was not convinced then that there is politics, or at least, no more than in any other complex human undertaking. Nevertheless, EA spans business and technology knowledge domains and crosses many internal organization boundaries and, as a result, it is prone to politics. Now, that I am closer to publish an updated version of the book, I started looking at politics in relation to EA. To find out, I searched the web, looking for a definition:

"Social relations involving authority or power".

"Politics is the process and method of making decisions for groups… While politics operates, all decisions are provisional!"

"Although it generally applies to governments, politics is also observed in all human group interactions including corporate, academic, and religious".

And about office politics: "social alliances often formed between colleagues of similar interests who may team up against other perceived competitors".

However, while formally correct, is this really what the suggestion was about? What about the day to day usage of the word. Since, this time, I could not find anything much on the web (?), I dared define it myself (with all the possible drawbacks) as consisting of:

Promises, frequently made by politicians before elections, seldom enacted

The impossibility to get straight answers from politicians when asking even the simplest of questions

High ground moral stances driven, in reality, by self interest

On a positive note, politicians must be energetic, skillful negotiators and decision makers to balance legitimate and conflicting interests of many parties. But what has all this to do with an Enterprise Architecture development and the Enterprise Architect? Enterprise Architecture and its promoters, myself included, promise a lot, but does it, or do we deliver?

Don't we sometimes assume the same moral high but safe ground when over selling the concept for the higher good of the Enterprise? The reality is that the typical EA development outcomes, more often than not, do not significantly change the structure of the organization or convey the much-touted agility to the firm. In other words, EA may not deliver to the promise. The truth is that the EA development can easily end up in various forms and shapes in the absence of an agreed definition or framework, since there is too much variability in terms of scope and deliveries. That is why US government mandated reference models to set expectations and be able to assemble the resulting artifacts in a coherent framework. A proper EA framework, reference model and process will fix this.

I heard rumours that IT fears the business reaction when confronting them with EA/SOA programs. Therefore, IT avoids naming it, substituting it instead with a discourse on benefits. This sounds a bit like the politician, avoiding a sensitive topic, with a convoluted response. But isn't this happening because EA and SOA have been grossly over hyped and over sold even before they were properly defined and scoped? Or, is it the "nervousness" of business, created by so many recent prophecies of "do EA/SOA or die"?

In reacting to this technology push, business does not contest the potential benefits but requires a business case and careful planning to justify and roadmap the move from the current, not badly yielding "status quo", to the revolutionary services based business (e.g. SOA) since the costs of the business disruption, might brake rather than make the business.

The divide between business and IT is a major source of debate in the Enterprise world and I would dare say, a breeding ground for politics. Business and IT speak different languages. They might look like two political parties engaged in a quest for the same holy grail, the budget. However, is it not the organization of the company and its governance, failing to align business and IT functions to a common strategy and objectives?

And is it not the Enterprise Architecture now charged with aligning the IT to business, that is, in effect, cross the political divide with the Enterprise Architect is in the lead?

The conclusions I can draw so far: an Enterprise Architect has to be politically astute to justify EA/SOA, argue the business case, rally support from stakeholders, keep management informed and optimistic, do the work and survive the process!

More on this, next time.

Adrian Grigoriu is an executive consultant in Enterprise Architecture now living in Sydney, Australia. Shortlisted for the Computer Weekly IT Industry blogger of the year 2011. Former Head of Architecture and EA at OFCOM, the Agency providing regulation to frequency spectrum utilization and broadcasting industry in the United Kingdom. Previously Chief Architect of TMForum, the standards organization providing Frameworx, the Integrated Business Architecture framework for the telecommunications and digital media industries. Adrian also is an Executive Enterprise Strategy and Architecture Consultant and author of "An Enterprise Architecture Development Framework" book available on Amazon and Kindle at Trafford and elsewhere. Reviews of the book are available from BPTrends and the Angry Architect. Here is a short Enterprise Architecture animated slideshow summarising his view. Adrian also offers an EA and business architecture training course on-demand, based on the book. You may get in touch at grigoriu@hotmail.co.uk. His website.

Popular White Paper On This Topic

1 Comments

Process doesn't fix anything. It is all about the people. If the federal government had the right people, then their EA initiatives may have a chance of producing real success and not just comprehensive documentation that sits on the shelf...

Disclaimer: Blog contents express the viewpoints of their independent authors and
are not reviewed for correctness or accuracy by
Toolbox for IT. Any opinions, comments, solutions or other commentary
expressed by blog authors are not endorsed or recommended by
Toolbox for IT
or any vendor. If you feel a blog entry is inappropriate,
click here to notify
Toolbox for IT.